This study focuses on the efforts of a city with 15 secondary school districts with an education policy that promotes a nine-year integrated curriculum beginning in 2018.How have primary and junior high school teachers, hampered by Covid19 from their originally planned education plans, implemented the collaboratively developed curriculum in their respective secondary school districts? The research question is: What role did teacher and student play in these crisis situations?

 The purpose of this study is to identify the teacher leadership that builds on teachers' own professional learning to respond to uncharted situations, the work of leaders in creating an environment and culture that causes teacher agency and student agency in the school, in the organization and management of a coordinated curriculum between primary and junior high school ( Harris, & Muijs, 2004, York-Barr. & Duke2004, Leijen, Pedaste, & Lepp, 2020).

 City A announced as its educational policy shifting education through co-operation between primary and junior high schools to a unified school that can provide education with a consistent curriculum for primary and junior high schools in 2017. It has begun deploying integrated education for primary and secondary schools throughout the city since 2018. At this point, schools and teachers were in a structure that followed the ‘the hierarchist’ way led by the local board of education (Hood 1998, Brown, Schildkamp & Hubers 2017) .

 However, after three years, differences were found in the results of their efforts and the awareness of teachers in the 15 secondary school districts in the city. Each secondary school district has been unable to implement the jointly developed curriculum under the influence of covid-19. Among the 15 secondary school districts, efforts to reduce students' anxiety, create safe and secure communication pathways, and guarantee learning opportunities have been commonly explored. Then, the educational concerns of each school were focused on the response to covid-19 and the execution of each school's events. As a result, the city survey results showed a decrease in the positive attitudes of teachers toward the integrated primary and junior high school education initiative. However, both teachers and students showed an interest in the program and were willing to get involved in some of the secondary districts.

 For example, in secondary school district A, the student council and the teacher team worked together to implement events for cross-grade exchange that were originally planned to be held face-to-face using the WWW conferencing system, to publish the secondary school district news, and to use ICT to communicate and learn among students and between teachers and students. In secondary school district B, teachers from both elementary and junior high schools planned and conducted a workshop to learn how to carefully observe the students who appear under such circumstances. Then, they discussed the image and goals of the students they wanted to nurture through the integrated elementary and junior high school education, and had an opportunity to discuss the contents of the classes and teaching methods, including the effective use of ICT, and proceeded with the training.

 The atmosphere of the A and B school's efforts changed from ‘the hierarchist way’ to ‘the egalitarian way’ as the principal paid attention to the agency of teachers and children and provided them with the opportunity and information to bring them out. In addition, they have built a network to connect with teachers from other schools and received support from outside the school for the school's efforts (Malin, Brown, & Ion, et al. 2020).

In this study, we focus on teacher leadership, teacher agency and student agency in order to analyse how each school district works voluntarily and actively in covid-19. For this purpose, we refer to previous studies as a theoretical framework for the development of questionnaire items and interview items. In particular, in order to see how teachers changed during the four years of their professional learning, the ecological approach model was used in the analysis. We investigate elementary school children's anxiety about going to secondary school and their interest in and satisfaction with their efforts for integrated school education before covid-19 and in covid-19. We also investigate how teachers felt about such efforts for integrated school education, and how they felt about teacher professional training for that purpose. We then compare and analyse the secondary school districts where the voices of the children and the voices of the teachers matched and the school districts that are out of alignment. The first year of investigations by questionnaires were implemented following a preparatory period of 1 year and at December of 2018. Subsequently, the second through fourth surveys were conducted in December 2019-2021. Students (approximately 4,500 fifth- and sixth-year primary-students; approximately 3,900 first- and second-year secondary-students) were surveyed about their opinions and attitudes towards efforts for integrated school education. The primary- and secondary-school students were asked the questions Q1 to Q18. They were asked to answer each question using a four-point scale. A total of 823 primary school teachers and 405 secondary school teachers completed the questionnaire at December of 2018 and 2021. The primary- and secondary-school teachers were asked the questions Q1 to Q12. They were asked to answer each question using a four-point scale. Two visits were made to each of three schools selected according to school size over survey period, and group interviews were conducted with teachers. We interpret them as values on an interval scale, acquired averages and standard deviations, and endeavour to investigate any changes in the children’s opinions and attitudes of the over the four years spanning from the preparatory period through the first year of measures.

The teachers were themselves less aware of the efforts and the student's evaluations of teachers were also low in school districts where the principal and teachers could not cooperate. In the A secondary school district, several teachers guided the practise and created a professional learning community. They were trying to work closely with the student council to create opportunities for students to come up with different ideas and to think about school events themselves. The principal recommended that a lot of information be obtained from teachers at other schools. B secondary school district did not have a central lead teacher. However, many teachers participated in discussions and think about opportunities, which created a professional learning community. Through interviews with the teachers, it became clear that teachers in the B secondary school district have many teachers outside of school that they can consult with, and many were obtaining information from them. The above A ,and B secondary school districts initially followed the lead of the local board of education. However, the atmosphere of the school's efforts changed from ‘the hierarchist way’ to ‘the egalitarian way’ as the principal paid attention to the agency of teachers and children and provided them with the opportunity and information to bring them out. They built a network to connect with teachers from other schools and received support from outside the school for the school's efforts. The teachers and schools in this City have used evidence-informed teaching practice to show teachers in other secondary school districts their creative efforts in integrated school education. In other words, they conducted the evidence-informed teaching practice while conscious that they will receive comments from other schools and create lessons with each other in order to generate ideas for better practise, rather than the consciousness of verifying the effects.

Brown, C.,Schildkamp,K., & Hubers,M.D. (2017). Combining the best of two worlds: a conceptual proposal for evidence-informed school improvement, Educational Research, 59(2), 154-172. Harris, A., & Muijs, D. (2004). Improving schools through teacher leadership. London, UK: Oxford University Press. Imants,J. & Van der Wal, M. M. (2020) A model of teacher agency in professional development and school reform, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 52:1, 1-14, Leijen,Ä., Pedaste, M. & Lepp, L. (2020) Teacher Agency Following the Ecological Model: How it is achieved and how it could be strengthened by different types of reflection. British Journal of Educational Studies, 68:3, 295-310. Nelson, J., & Campbell, C. (2017) .Evidence-informed practice in education: meanings and applications, Educational Research, 59(2), 127-135. Oolbekkink-Marchand H. W., Hadar, L. L., Smith, K., Helleve I., & Ulvik, M. (2017). Teachers' perceived professional space and their agency. Teaching and Teacher Education 62, 37-46 Priestly, M., Edwards, R., Priestly, A., & Miller, K. (2012). Teacher agency in curriculum making: Agents of change and spaces for manoeuvre. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(2), 191–214. Rickinson,M., de Bruin, K., Walsh, L., & Hall,M. (2017). What can evidence-use in practice learn from evidence-use in policy?, Educational Research, 59(2), 173-189. York-Barr, J. & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255-316. Zeiser, K., Scholz, C., & Cirks, V.(2018). Maximizing Student Agency. Implementing and Measuring Student-Centered Learning Practices. American Institutes for Research (AIR) . ( from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED592084.pdf )